DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional

[Geor!]

Good for some, bad for others. I personally think it was the correct ruling, but I know I'll be in the minority on this website.

Now that they have their rights though, can we now be through with the entire culture being thrown in everyone's face? Television is saturated with it, annual parades of them prancing around in the streets half naked and what not. You have your rights queers, now live like a normal goddamn human being and quit shoving your sin in my face.

[Vertnut]

After the last ruling on state's right's and voting, I figured as much. Keep it even and throw the libs a bone. The supreme's are just as political as the rest of the country.

[Sean88gt]

Blacks seem up in arms after this and the VRA ruling.

[Forever_frost]

It's absolutely the correct ruling. The federal government has no authority in marriage as it's not in their enumerated powers

[Baron Von Crowder]

It's absolutely the correct ruling. The federal government has no authority in marriage as it's none of thier fucking buisness

fixed.

[jdgregory84]

Goddammit. Now we won't even be able to walk down the street without seeing homos sucking each other off.

[lowthreeohz]

Goddammit. Now we won't even be able to walk down the street without seeing homos sucking each other off.

Aren't you in Austin? Nothing will have changed.

[Dacotua]

So when will polygamy be legal? There are some people in jail that were convicted of this.

I figured if gays can be married why cant straight dudes have multiple wives. Imagine the tax write offs!!!!

[EW]

I don't care if people are gay or married or whatever. Just be gay and shut the fuck up about it. You do not have more rights just because you're messed up in the brain head.

[jdgregory84]

Aren't you in Austin? Nothing will have changed.

In Buda, just South of the Bukkake queer fest that most people call Austin.

[Gargamel]

So when will polygamy be legal? There are some people in jail that were convicted of this.

I figured if gays can be married why cant straight dudes have multiple wives. Imagine the tax write offs!!!!

That's next...

If you can't define marriage as between a man an a woman at the federal level (Frost is correct about constitutional limits), who's to say that it has to be only 2 people?

This shit has already gone down to the state level in a lot of cases anyway...

(Interested in when we start seeing the first Polygamist cases hitting the courts.... it shouldn't be long.)

[Vertnut]

That's next...

If you can't define marriage as between a man an a woman at the federal level (Frost is correct about constitutional limits), who's to say that it has to be only 2 people?

This shit has already gone down to the state level in a lot of cases anyway...

(Interested in when we start seeing the first Polygamist cases hitting the courts.... it shouldn't be long.)

How about if the supreme court decides that pedophiles have "rights"? Does a guy have the "right" to marry a ten-year-old girl? Boy? Both? Several of each?
With no "basis" other than someone's "right", where's the limit?
The people of California voted, with a strong majority, against "gay marriage", and the supreme court just nullified the entire voting populace of California. What's next?

[stevo]

How about if the supreme court decides that pedophiles have "rights"? Does a guy have the "right" to marry a ten-year-old girl? Boy? Both? Several of each?
With no "basis" other than someone's "right", where's the limit?
The people of California voted, with a strong majority, against "gay marriage", and the supreme court just nullified the entire voting populace of California. What's next?

All that has to happen is for it to become a recognized mental illness.

Stevo

[racrguy]

How about if the supreme court decides that pedophiles have "rights"? Does a guy have the "right" to marry a ten-year-old girl? Boy? Both? Several of each?
With no "basis" other than someone's "right", where's the limit?

Do we REALLY have to go over this bullshit line of thinking again? This has already been hashed out and explained. Why do opponents of gay marriage think that because a couple of dudes or a couple of chicks can get married the next logical step is kid fucking? Pedophiles do have rights, the same rights you and I do until they're removed via due process.

The people of California voted, with a strong majority, against "gay marriage", and the supreme court just nullified the entire voting populace of California. What's next?

Define what a strong majority is. I'm thinking you cross the threshold of strong majority when you progress into double digit percentage points difference.

Remember: Majority rules, minority rights.

[Gargamel]

Do we REALLY have to go over this bullshit line of thinking again? This has already been hashed out and explained. Why do opponents of gay marriage think that because a couple of dudes or a couple of chicks can get married the next logical step is kid fucking? Pedophiles do have rights, the same rights you and I do until they're removed via due process.


Define what a strong majority is. I'm thinking you cross the threshold of strong majority when you progress into double digit percentage points difference.

Remember: Majority rules, minority rights.

Other than the fact that the number of people in the social contract is 2, I can't think of a single argument that gay marriage advocates have used that cannot be used by an advocate of Polygamist marriage.

Let me re-iterate the fact that I don't believe that the federal government should have anything to do with marriage in the first place.

While I may personally believe in what DOMA was, it had no place in federal government.

This is a state thing, and most likely where the ground war on this will be fought, no matter where the subject ends up....